Help
kupi007, on 2012-July-25, 12:01, said:
Reading all the posts, now i realized problem is more complex...
1. I dont think neboulous 2♣ made damage, even if it would promise 4, still responder may prefer to support ♠ with and marginal hand, creating same issues to what suit is actually agreed.
A good rule of thumb is that 3♠ establishes spades as trumps unless a slam is bid. Then, fewer issues exist.
2. If responder take capitancy he will never get known about Q♠ or K♣, dependig on what suit will be agreed.
If OPENER takes captaincy, using my methods, he can bid 5♣ as RKCB for clubs, where he will find out the club Queen and will know himself about the spade King an Queen. Thus, for example, a possible auction might be:
1♠-2♣
3♣-3♠
3NT(serious)-4♦(diamond control, not two top clubs)
5♣(RKCB clubs)-5NT(two key cards plus the club Queen)
6♦(diamond King?)-7♣(yes, and real clubs)
3. I dont think 3♦ by opener may be splinter, couse we cannot splinter into side suit w/o known support to this suit...maybe nebolous 2♣ isnt so great after all:)
This is why I define 3♦ as a picture bid (three of the top four spades, two of the top three clubs, stiff in diamonds, no heart control), namely because I want this bid to be very precise as to what I have, in case partner's 2♣ was funny. Helps with deciding to bid or not bid 3NT and whether to try a 5-2 game in my major.
4. I also dont think 4♣ after 3♠ may be minorwood, couse of same reasons as 3, although minorwood here would make grand easy to bid.
Agreed.
5. 3NT as sirious/non sirious, problem of suit agreement still exist, but even if not, i m not great fan of removal of jugment from chossing 3NT instead of 4M on 8card fit.
I just do not think it to be practical, after 1M-2♣-3♣-3M to have clubs, the major, AND 3NT in focus. You are trying to do too much to land on a dime in 3NT, when Opener cannot possibly have the info necessary to make 3NT seem right. If he has a hand where 3NT might be right, he should not bid 3♣, IMO, but should instead bid 2NT (or preferably 2♦ waiting).
6. After reading everything i still dont see purpose in 3♠, i think that simple 4♣ as agreement of ♣ would lead to grand (unless opener have problems with counting to 13)
1. I dont think neboulous 2♣ made damage, even if it would promise 4, still responder may prefer to support ♠ with and marginal hand, creating same issues to what suit is actually agreed.
A good rule of thumb is that 3♠ establishes spades as trumps unless a slam is bid. Then, fewer issues exist.
2. If responder take capitancy he will never get known about Q♠ or K♣, dependig on what suit will be agreed.
If OPENER takes captaincy, using my methods, he can bid 5♣ as RKCB for clubs, where he will find out the club Queen and will know himself about the spade King an Queen. Thus, for example, a possible auction might be:
1♠-2♣
3♣-3♠
3NT(serious)-4♦(diamond control, not two top clubs)
5♣(RKCB clubs)-5NT(two key cards plus the club Queen)
6♦(diamond King?)-7♣(yes, and real clubs)
3. I dont think 3♦ by opener may be splinter, couse we cannot splinter into side suit w/o known support to this suit...maybe nebolous 2♣ isnt so great after all:)
This is why I define 3♦ as a picture bid (three of the top four spades, two of the top three clubs, stiff in diamonds, no heart control), namely because I want this bid to be very precise as to what I have, in case partner's 2♣ was funny. Helps with deciding to bid or not bid 3NT and whether to try a 5-2 game in my major.
4. I also dont think 4♣ after 3♠ may be minorwood, couse of same reasons as 3, although minorwood here would make grand easy to bid.
Agreed.
5. 3NT as sirious/non sirious, problem of suit agreement still exist, but even if not, i m not great fan of removal of jugment from chossing 3NT instead of 4M on 8card fit.
I just do not think it to be practical, after 1M-2♣-3♣-3M to have clubs, the major, AND 3NT in focus. You are trying to do too much to land on a dime in 3NT, when Opener cannot possibly have the info necessary to make 3NT seem right. If he has a hand where 3NT might be right, he should not bid 3♣, IMO, but should instead bid 2NT (or preferably 2♦ waiting).
6. After reading everything i still dont see purpose in 3♠, i think that simple 4♣ as agreement of ♣ would lead to grand (unless opener have problems with counting to 13)
(See notes above in the quote...) Frankly, this last point makes no sense. How is Opener supposed to know this? Opener, again, is the one bidding 4♣, but Opener cannot see Responder's hand. It might make more sense (not my idea) for Opener to bid 3NT as "Serious for Clubs" and then to allow Responder to THEN bid 4♣ as "I agree with that idea," even if that is not my preference. But, Opener cannot demand to play in clubs, as OPENER does not know Responder's club situation.